2009 (2) TMI 642

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Appellant. Shri S.M. Vaidya, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J)]. -  Vide order No. C-II/2183/WZB/2003, dated 28-8-2003, the appeal of the applicant was rejected on the ground that once they have opted for compounded levy scheme, for payment of duty, they cannot revert back to payment of duty on the basis of actual production. 2. The learned ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s passed by the Commissioner have not finalised the annual capacity of production and subsequent demands were premature. Though the learned Advocate fairly agrees that in the present case there is no duty confirmed and it is the order of the Commissioner passed on their APC, which stands challenged. However, he further agrees that inasmuch as the impugned order has left the question of fixation of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....vocate that the appeal is to be dismissed as infructuous. 4. In rejoinder, the learned Advocate draws our attention to the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in the case of Vadilal Industries Ltd. v. UOI 2006 (197) E.L.T. 160 (Guj.) = 2006 (73) RLT 435 (Guj.), laying down that the period of limitation to file ROM application is required to be computed from the date of receipt of the ord....